fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3069 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3069 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

__________________________________________________

13.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 086 secrets from Secret Submission Post #439.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

08. http://i.imgur.com/jyVzQwF.png

Am I the only one who feels as if this is a reeeeeally old repeat?

No. I think I've seen this one too.

Nope, I seem to remember it too. Or at least another very similar secret. (Though I agree all the same: it isn't cute or funny when media does this, it just irritates me.)

I'm 90% sure it is, but I don't care. Repeats are kind of fun.

I remember seeing it as well.

Yeah, I feel you. I think it's a way to get a cheap laugh from the lowest common denominator of the audience who still feels like guys can't show emotion or affection because it's gross and unmanly.

I don't think it's irrational. Just because it's a joke doesn't mean it's not tasteless or stupid. Actually, the fact that two guys showing emotional connections with each other is often played as a haha no homo joke is kind of offensive and dumb.

The only case in which I approve of it is when it's used as a reason to make the men in question angsty, leading at first to less physical contact and then to them being all over each other because they really miss what they used to have. GIMME. >:D

I know it's often used as a joke device (which it shouldn't be) but I just like it when men are really in love with each other and are extremely close.

Like I loved Cory and Shawn, I also loved JD and Turk, and Shawn and Gus.

Oh, man, JD and Turk. Generally speaking, I share the OP's opinion on the matter, but with Scrubs I don't even care that it's often played as a joke. They're so epic.

Turk and JD were an adorable friendship and they truly loved each other. Plus Scrubs did a lot of things right in the way they did their comedy.

I always appreciated that Scrubs had funny women as well, so many comedies of the time (and today) often just put women in as the straight one.

Yes, that's definitely true. And I loved Carla!

Generally speaking, I share the OP's opinion on the matter, but with Scrubs I don't even care that it's often played as a joke.

Yeah, this. :) Turk and JD are the big exception to my annoyance with "lol so gay" jokes. Probably because they act so over the top about their Guy Love that it wraps all the way back around and turns into a whole different layer of humor.

Troy and Abed in the moooooorning.

In most cases, I would agree with you. In the case of Corey and Shawn, that was (and continues to be), an awful lot of touching for ANY two friends of any gender... I don't think it was meant to be as much as "look at how unnatural these boys are" as much as "look at how unnaturally close these friends are". It's an important distinction. None of the other friendships (or even most of the relationships) on the show involved as much touching.

I guess that's true...though it seemed like when Topanga said stuff like "Stop it, you're boys!" she was meant to be the "sane" one and Cory and Shawn the weird ones whose behavior was hilarious.

Plus, it's a new-ish thing that only really started happening in the '90s. There were super-close friendships on TV and in movies earlier on that didn't have any "lol they're so close gaaaay" jokes at all, so my issue with these sort of jokes isn't about offensiveness or lack thereof, it's that they're really just totally unnecessary, and also cliched. Sure, you *could* make a joke about their closeness...but why?

How do you define "awful lot of touching for friends"? In my culture, male friends even hold hands and kiss as a greeting and goodbye.

Late, but I meant, within the compounds of the show...

I hate this and the opposite: Men showing physical affection - must be gay and don't you dare challenge that, you bigot!"

I don't know if that's the opposite. Isn't it kind of the exact same thing, just with different parameters?

"Ew, if a man shows closeness to another man, that's unmanly and gross and wrong! Especially if they're gay, because being gay is automatically like being a girl, and everyone knows girls are inferior dogshit."

vs

"LOL, if a man to show closeness to another man, that's unmanly and gross and wrong. Unless they're gay of course, then it's awesome. But if you don't have the excuse of wanting to fuck each other, you better stop it and act like normal heterosexual adults."

Obviously, the first version has caused way more direct tangible harm to actual people and society, but I don't see a logical difference between the two. Just branches of the exact same gender rigidity.

AYRT
No. No I don't think they're the same, because your examples posit WILD speculation on what people who insist characters are gay must think about straight characters.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2015-05-30 23:57 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2015-05-31 00:01 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2015-05-31 00:08 (UTC) - Expand

This. I totally understand wanting to interpret things as gay, because mainstream media is so homophobic and devoid of gay characters and relationships. But insisting it's the only possibility? That's just feeding into the exact kind of heteronormative gender-role bullshit that LGBT rights and feminism and non-traditionalism are supposed to be fighting against.

I don't think it's that trivial a thing. One of the theories of why men have such a higher suicide rate is that men feel like they can't express their emotions.

I thought that was more of a theory behind violent attacks/violent crime that isn't motivated by personal or monetary gain, or acting out in other destructive ways?

I think the higher suicide rate is more because men choose more lethal methods of suicide.